This wiki explores what zero tolerance policies are, how they work, their history, the pros' and cons' of the issue, the effects they have on children and society. Finally this wiki offers possible solutions to the problems that are created by these bureaucratic rules.
What are they?
Zero tolerance policies are policies that government bodies and organizations put in place to control parts of the populace considered "dangerous". Many of these policies were adopted during the time immediately following the Columbine shooting. They are used in schools to give students and administrators rules and to ensure the safety of those within the system. There were many misconceptions about zero tolerance policies when they were first created. The time of the Columbine shootings was tense and to dispel that tension schools began adopting the Zero Tolerance policies that the United States had previously enacted to battle the influx of illegal weapons and drugs. These policies, however, were expanded to include any and everything that the school system considered to be contraband. "In schools across the U.S., out-of-school suspensions have become the default punishment not only for drug possession and fights but also for threats, displays of affection, dress-code violations, truancy, tardiness, refusal to follow directions, even 4-year-olds' temper tantrums" (Carr, Do 'Zero Tolerance' School Discipline Policies Go Too Far). Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2115402,00.html#ixzz1vd7PHd2hThe burgeoning populations of schools brings more students with various backgrounds together. The tension that arises from the overcrowding can, in rare circumstances, lead to students clashing with one another. The few incidents of school violence in the past couple of decades has been blamed on this over population as well as bullying and other factors. (To read more about bullying and/or cyber-bullying go to this link: Cyberbullying in Schools by Megan Catchings. The trend of burgeoning school populations gave rise to the need for policies that would contribute towards the order and peace within the school system. "By 1993 zero tolerance policies were being adopted by school boards across the country, often broadened to include not only drugs and weapons but also tobacco-related offenses and school disruption. In 1994 the federal government stepped in to mandate the policy nationally when President Clinton signed the Gun-Free Schools Act into law. This law mandatesan expulsionof one calendar year for possession of a weapon and referral of students who violate the law to the criminal or juvenile justice system.It also provides that the one-year expulsions may be modified by the 'chief administrative officer' of each local school district on a case-by-case basis (Skiba, R et al, 2)". This means that the administrators of the school can alter the consequences given to any one student based on the situation. However, in the same article, it is mentioned that many of these same administrators feel that they have no power to do anything but enforce the rules. This thought is a common misconception that many administrators and teachers have been shown to have.
While safety in schools is a definite need; zero tolerance policies, due to their nature, do not discriminate nor do they analyze circumstances to determine whether or not a punishment is appropriate. Zero tolerance policies create just that, zero tolerance. That means that a child, no matter what age, experience level, social skill level and understanding faces the same punishments meted out to any other child. No account is taken for circumstances, individual rights, knowledge level nor understanding of why they are being punished. Five year old kindergartners who are just learning the basics of discipline and often do not understand the rules that they are breaking are punished equally with a child at 17 years of age who may or may not have understanding of those same rules.
These policies also do not discriminate between bullies and victims. Bullies are punished but so are the victims if they try to defend themselves . These types of policies punish any person who defends their rights against the violator just as much as it punishes the "rule-breakers". While the intent behind these policies are genuine and valid; many administrators think that the policies themselves leave no room for alteration with regards to punishment.
Trend or Issue?
This brings up the question; are Zero Tolerance policies trends or issues? Webster's Dictionary, defines a trend as, “a direction in which something moves”, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trend by this definition the burgeoning population of the United States and, by default, the schools is a trend. The government had its own zero tolerance policies with regards to drugs and this idea filtered down to the schools. " ‘Zero Tolerance’ initially was defined as consistently enforced suspension and expulsion policies in response to weapons, drugs and violent acts in the school setting (NASP, website)”. This gave rise to the trend towards no tolerance policies. This rising trend has, however, revealed several key issues within the school systems that adopt them. “According to data from the U.S. Department of Education and the Center for Safe and Responsive Schools, at least 75% of schools report having zero tolerance policies for such serious offenses as:
Among disciplinary actions mandated by zero tolerance policies, suspension is most frequently used for an extensive range of common offenses, from attendance problems to disrespect and noncompliance. However, broad zero tolerance policies require that both minor and major disciplinary events be treated equally(NASP, Website)”. This “equal” treatment is part of the issue that has arisen from these policies. "The criticisms have increased in the past two years as zero-tolerance policies have become standard operating procedure in the nation's 109,000 public schools (Cauchon, USA Today)". School boards, administrators and teachers often takes this part of the as the general rule and enforce a zero tolerance policy that restricts student freedom and prevents administrators and teachers from dealing with each student issue on merit of the situation. Analysis must be given with regards to the pros’ and cons’ of Zero Tolerance policies to determine whether or not they are a trend or an issue or as argued here in this paper, both. However, due to the rigidity of the policies themselves they have increasingly proven to be a root source of many issues within the school system itself.
The pros’ are the following:
Administrators have the power to deal with problems through more radical means such as suspension or expulsion.
The intention behind these Zero Tolerance policies are genuine
Students who already respect the rules are more likely to think about their actions before they do anything “questionable”.
The cons’ are
Many administrators feel that they cannot do anything but follow the rule to the letter of the law or they will lose their jobs.
There is confusion about how much power these same administrators have with regards to punishing students by situation rather than punishing them by a single rule.
Parents have very little say in what punishment is given to their child.
Children are often pushed out of school due to minor infractions that “violate” the Zero tolerance policies in place.
These children are often punished severely for age appropriate behavior.
Those children who are punished are given no leeway for the level of their understanding, i.e. they often do not understand why they are being punished.
Children are likely to be punished on multiple occasions that result in major absences which then results in failure of the grade regardless of their academic level.
Children that receive punishment in this manner often drop out of school and are either sent to alternative school or become a part of the street culture.
Unfortunately there are many more cons’ than pros’ and it must, therefore, be assumed that No Tolerance policies are both trends and issues within the bureaucratic school systems. These issues lead to many different questions regarding these types of policies. The following paragraphs will further discuss the effects zero tolerance policies have on education and the children who are being educated. There will be several links to videos and statistics charts that will further develop how this type of policy has become an issue within our school systems.
Effects on Education and Children
The effects that these policies have on students and their educations is largely yet to be seen. The absences that accumulate from being suspended can cause students to fail grades and if the offenses for which they were suspended were minor then that can give them the impression that they are "doomed" to fail. This can result in students dropping out of school, living on the streets, and because of desperation a rise in crime. ""Whether zero tolerance is the guiding principle in law enforcement or the catchphrase for punitive disciplinary practices in schools, the use of zero tolerance is always exclusionary, which is to claim that the victims of the practice are denied a basic equality of being, the foundation of any substantive and vibrant democracy (Robbins, C.G. 2)". Otherwise stated, a zero tolerance policy is, by nature, discriminatory and restrictive with the adverse effect of being harmful to those same students it was made to protect. There have been many examples of how these policies have been abused by the system; as well as by those who do not understand that they do have the ability to bend the rules.
For example some students were sent home for bringing common over the counter medicines to school. Other students were punished for bringing toys with them. Should students be suspended or expelled for bringing the following items to school?
The phrasing of many schools' Zero Tolerance policies would force teachers and administrators to suspend or expel students who brought such items to school. Though there is wording in state and federal laws that allow the head administrator the ability to alter the punishments meted out by their employees the problems usually go unnoticed.
Many people have suggested that the solution to zero tolerance policies is to simply replace them with policies that allow for greater flexibility in regards to the consequences of breaking the rules. Others say that this would not be enough because it is often how these policies are interpreted that makes the difference. There is, however, a general consensus that there needs to be a definite change to the system and the way that it is run. Most people agree that the zero tolerance policies have in fact harmed students far more than they have helped them and that this is due to the lack of people wishing to take responsibility for both the punishment as well as the consequences that result from the lack of or excess of these punitive measures.
Websites and Sources
Unknown. (2001). “Zero Tolerance and Alternative Strategies:A Fact Sheet for Educators and Policymakers”. The National Association of School Psychologists. na. Retrieved from: http://www.nasponline.org/resources/factsheets/zt_fs.aspx This source explores Zero Tolerance policies in schools. Explains the faults and discusses what is good about these policies. The article then suggests alternatives that may work better than those already in place.
Carr, S. (2012). Do 'Zero Tolerance' School Discipline Policies Go Too Far? Time U.S. na. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2115402,00.html. This article is an inquiry into zero tolerance policies in school. Though this is not a "scholarly" article it had some very good points. This was well written and well thought out.
Cauchon, D. (1999). Zero Tolerance Policies Lack Flexibility. USA Today. na. retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/educate/ednews3.htm . This critique of Zero Tolerance policies also explores the administrators' and teachers' roles within the system and discusses how these policies are now being criticized by the general public. I thought this was a good source because it reviewed actual examples of policy abuse.
Robbins, C.G. (2005). Zero Tolerance and the Politics of Racial Injustice. Journal of Negro Education. 74(1), 2-17 This article explores the issue of Zero Tolerance policies in schools with regards to how they affect the children of "people of color". The article basically states that there is an even more negative impact on children of other races because they are more often portrayed by society as "troublemakers". I decided this would be a good article because it explores these policies from a different cultural outlook.
Skiba, R & Peterson, R. (1999). The Dark Side of Zero Tolerance: Can Punishment Lead to Safe Schools? The Phi Delta Kappan. 80 (5), 372-376 & 381-382. This article basically states that most of these policies are being enforced in such an extreme manner because the authorities, school administration and the like, feel that their hands are tied with regards to the consequences that they must enforce. This article concurs with the article from the Journal of Negro Education in that it states that most of the students that are affected are people of color. I felt that the statistics within this article are particularly helpful and that the charts provide great insight into this topic.
Speak Up Fight Back. (2010, Feb 4). 4th Grade Student Nearly Suspended Over 2-inch LEGO Toy Gun (Staten Island, NY). Video Podcast retrieved from http://youtu.be/l-yDiOXUHfc.
Trend. (n.d.) In Merriam-Webster online. retrieved from www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trend. The dictionary is a good source to help define what trends and issues are as it lists the origional definition. I also felt that a definition would be helpful by allowing me to base my ideas off of the actual meaning of the word.
Zero Tolerance PoliciesThis wiki explores what zero tolerance policies are, how they work, their history, the pros' and cons' of the issue, the effects they have on children and society. Finally this wiki offers possible solutions to the problems that are created by these bureaucratic rules.
What are they?
Zero tolerance policies are policies that government bodies and organizations put in place to control parts of the populace considered "dangerous". Many of these policies were adopted during the time immediately following the Columbine shooting. They are used in schools to give students and administrators rules and to ensure the safety of those within the system. There were many misconceptions about zero tolerance policies when they were first created. The time of the Columbine shootings was tense and to dispel that tension schools began adopting the Zero Tolerance policies that the United States had previously enacted to battle the influx of illegal weapons and drugs. These policies, however, were expanded to include any and everything that the school system considered to be contraband. "In schools across the U.S., out-of-school suspensions have become the default punishment not only for drug possession and fights but also for threats, displays of affection, dress-code violations, truancy, tardiness, refusal to follow directions, even 4-year-olds' temper tantrums" (Carr, Do 'Zero Tolerance' School Discipline Policies Go Too Far). Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2115402,00.html#ixzz1vd7PHd2hThe burgeoning populations of schools brings more students with various backgrounds together. The tension that arises from the overcrowding can, in rare circumstances, lead to students clashing with one another. The few incidents of school violence in the past couple of decades has been blamed on this over population as well as bullying and other factors. (To read more about bullying and/or cyber-bullying go to this link: Cyberbullying in Schools by Megan Catchings. The trend of burgeoning school populations gave rise to the need for policies that would contribute towards the order and peace within the school system. "By 1993 zero tolerance policies were being adopted by school boards across the country, often broadened to include not only drugs and weapons but also tobacco-related offenses and school disruption. In 1994 the federal government stepped in to mandate the policy nationally when President Clinton signed the Gun-Free Schools Act into law. This law mandates an expulsion of one calendar year for possession of a weapon and referral of students who violate the law to the criminal or juvenile justice system. It also provides that the one-year expulsions may be modified by the 'chief administrative officer' of each local school district on a case-by-case basis (Skiba, R et al, 2)". This means that the administrators of the school can alter the consequences given to any one student based on the situation. However, in the same article, it is mentioned that many of these same administrators feel that they have no power to do anything but enforce the rules. This thought is a common misconception that many administrators and teachers have been shown to have.While safety in schools is a definite need; zero tolerance policies, due to their nature, do not discriminate nor do they analyze circumstances to determine whether or not a punishment is appropriate. Zero tolerance policies create just that, zero tolerance. That means that a child, no matter what age, experience level, social skill level and understanding faces the same punishments meted out to any other child. No account is taken for circumstances, individual rights, knowledge level nor understanding of why they are being punished. Five year old kindergartners who are just learning the basics of discipline and often do not understand the rules that they are breaking are punished equally with a child at 17 years of age who may or may not have understanding of those same rules.
These policies also do not discriminate between bullies and victims. Bullies are punished but so are the victims if they try to defend themselves . These types of policies punish any person who defends their rights against the violator just as much as it punishes the "rule-breakers". While the intent behind these policies are genuine and valid; many administrators think that the policies themselves leave no room for alteration with regards to punishment.
Trend or Issue?
This brings up the question; are Zero Tolerance policies trends or issues? Webster's Dictionary, defines a trend as, “a direction in which something moves”, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trend by this definition the burgeoning population of the United States and, by default, the schools is a trend. The government had its own zero tolerance policies with regards to drugs and this idea filtered down to the schools. " ‘Zero Tolerance’ initially was defined as consistently enforced suspension and expulsion policies in response to weapons, drugs and violent acts in the school setting (NASP, website)”. This gave rise to the trend towards no tolerance policies. This rising trend has, however, revealed several key issues within the school systems that adopt them. “According to data from the U.S. Department of Education and the Center for Safe and Responsive Schools, at least 75% of schools report having zero tolerance policies for such serious offenses as:
firearms (94%)Guns
weapons other than firearms (91%)Other types of weapons
alcohol (87%)Alcoholic Drinks
drugs (88%)Various Illegal Drugs
violence (79%)Spiral Fracture
tobacco (79%) Tobacco Products
Among disciplinary actions mandated by zero tolerance policies, suspension is most frequently used for an extensive range of common offenses, from attendance problems to disrespect and noncompliance. However, broad zero tolerance policies require that both minor and major disciplinary events be treated equally(NASP, Website)”. This “equal” treatment is part of the issue that has arisen from these policies. "The criticisms have increased in the past two years as zero-tolerance policies have become standard operating procedure in the nation's 109,000 public schools (Cauchon, USA Today)". School boards, administrators and teachers often takes this part of the as the general rule and enforce a zero tolerance policy that restricts student freedom and prevents administrators and teachers from dealing with each student issue on merit of the situation. Analysis must be given with regards to the pros’ and cons’ of Zero Tolerance policies to determine whether or not they are a trend or an issue or as argued here in this paper, both. However, due to the rigidity of the policies themselves they have increasingly proven to be a root source of many issues within the school system itself.
The pros’ are the following:
Administrators have the power to deal with problems through more radical means such as suspension or expulsion.
The intention behind these Zero Tolerance policies are genuine
Students who already respect the rules are more likely to think about their actions before they do anything “questionable”.
The cons’ are
Many administrators feel that they cannot do anything but follow the rule to the letter of the law or they will lose their jobs.
There is confusion about how much power these same administrators have with regards to punishing students by situation rather than punishing them by a single rule.
Parents have very little say in what punishment is given to their child.
Children are often pushed out of school due to minor infractions that “violate” the Zero tolerance policies in place.
These children are often punished severely for age appropriate behavior.
Those children who are punished are given no leeway for the level of their understanding, i.e. they often do not understand why they are being punished.
Children are likely to be punished on multiple occasions that result in major absences which then results in failure of the grade regardless of their academic level.
Children that receive punishment in this manner often drop out of school and are either sent to alternative school or become a part of the street culture.
Unfortunately there are many more cons’ than pros’ and it must, therefore, be assumed that No Tolerance policies are both trends and issues within the bureaucratic school systems. These issues lead to many different questions regarding these types of policies. The following paragraphs will further discuss the effects zero tolerance policies have on education and the children who are being educated. There will be several links to videos and statistics charts that will further develop how this type of policy has become an issue within our school systems.
Effects on Education and Children
The effects that these policies have on students and their educations is largely yet to be seen. The absences that accumulate from being suspended can cause students to fail grades and if the offenses for which they were suspended were minor then that can give them the impression that they are "doomed" to fail. This can result in students dropping out of school, living on the streets, and because of desperation a rise in crime. ""Whether zero tolerance is the guiding principle in law enforcement or the catchphrase for punitive disciplinary practices in schools, the use of zero tolerance is always exclusionary, which is to claim that the victims of the practice are denied a basic equality of being, the foundation of any substantive and vibrant democracy (Robbins, C.G. 2)". Otherwise stated, a zero tolerance policy is, by nature, discriminatory and restrictive with the adverse effect of being harmful to those same students it was made to protect. There have been many examples of how these policies have been abused by the system; as well as by those who do not understand that they do have the ability to bend the rules.For example some students were sent home for bringing common over the counter medicines to school. Other students were punished for bringing toys with them.
Should students be suspended or expelled for bringing the following items to school?
Toys or Deadly Weapons?
Necklace or Gun?
Medicine for Cramps or Deadly drug?
Mouthwash or Gateway Drug?
Innocent Hairspray or Bomb?
The phrasing of many schools' Zero Tolerance policies would force teachers and administrators to suspend or expel students who brought such items to school. Though there is wording in state and federal laws that allow the head administrator the ability to alter the punishments meted out by their employees the problems usually go unnoticed.
Stories
There are many stories that show the harmful side of Zero Tolerance Policies. Here are a few:1. http://youtu.be/yfK4u3Hg2H4
2. http://youtu.be/tETiJMSehkE
3. http://youtu.be/l-yDiOXUHfc
Possible Solutions
Many people have suggested that the solution to zero tolerance policies is to simply replace them with policies that allow for greater flexibility in regards to the consequences of breaking the rules. Others say that this would not be enough because it is often how these policies are interpreted that makes the difference. There is, however, a general consensus that there needs to be a definite change to the system and the way that it is run. Most people agree that the zero tolerance policies have in fact harmed students far more than they have helped them and that this is due to the lack of people wishing to take responsibility for both the punishment as well as the consequences that result from the lack of or excess of these punitive measures.Websites and Sources
Unknown. (2001). “Zero Tolerance and Alternative Strategies:A Fact Sheet for Educators and Policymakers”. The National Association of School Psychologists. na. Retrieved from: http://www.nasponline.org/resources/factsheets/zt_fs.aspx This source explores Zero Tolerance policies in schools. Explains the faults and discusses what is good about these policies. The article then suggests alternatives that may work better than those already in place.
ABC News. (2009, Oct 13). Zero Tolerance Gone Too Far? Video Podcast retrieved from http://youtu.be/yfK4u3Hg2H4
(2009, Nov 11). Food Fight Lands Kids in Jail. Video Podcast retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tETiJMSehkE&feature=youtu.be
Carr, S. (2012). Do 'Zero Tolerance' School Discipline Policies Go Too Far? Time U.S. na. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2115402,00.html. This article is an inquiry into zero tolerance policies in school. Though this is not a "scholarly" article it had some very good points. This was well written and well thought out.
Cauchon, D. (1999). Zero Tolerance Policies Lack Flexibility. USA Today. na. retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/educate/ednews3.htm . This critique of Zero Tolerance policies also explores the administrators' and teachers' roles within the system and discusses how these policies are now being criticized by the general public. I thought this was a good source because it reviewed actual examples of policy abuse.
Robbins, C.G. (2005). Zero Tolerance and the Politics of Racial Injustice. Journal of Negro Education. 74(1), 2-17 This article explores the issue of Zero Tolerance policies in schools with regards to how they affect the children of "people of color". The article basically states that there is an even more negative impact on children of other races because they are more often portrayed by society as "troublemakers". I decided this would be a good article because it explores these policies from a different cultural outlook.
Skiba, R & Peterson, R. (1999). The Dark Side of Zero Tolerance: Can Punishment Lead to Safe Schools? The Phi Delta Kappan. 80 (5), 372-376 & 381-382. This article basically states that most of these policies are being enforced in such an extreme manner because the authorities, school administration and the like, feel that their hands are tied with regards to the consequences that they must enforce. This article concurs with the article from the Journal of Negro Education in that it states that most of the students that are affected are people of color. I felt that the statistics within this article are particularly helpful and that the charts provide great insight into this topic.
Speak Up Fight Back. (2010, Feb 4). 4th Grade Student Nearly Suspended Over 2-inch LEGO Toy Gun (Staten Island, NY). Video Podcast retrieved from http://youtu.be/l-yDiOXUHfc.
Trend. (n.d.) In Merriam-Webster online. retrieved from www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/trend. The dictionary is a good source to help define what trends and issues are as it lists the origional definition. I also felt that a definition would be helpful by allowing me to base my ideas off of the actual meaning of the word.
Proposal Addressing this Issue: